The Super Awesome Apocaplyse/Interceptor Topic!

[podtech115]

What agenda indeed. It's a.....mystery! Dang those mysterious enemies. Exactly my point, thanks.

The thing is, it was there. The series just never got around to going into detail of what that agenda ultimately consisted of.

Yeah, but now I think the black blob and.... Whatever-That-Thing-Is are more mysterious then the space Sectoids Nazi.

As for the rest of your post, not gonna comment because it's just thinly veiled Ellis bashing, which is pretty boring and usually off base.

Then I guess I win. You lose.

If the mystery part was they wanted the Earth, then I guess there is no more mysteriousness.

And to add more pain:

Cyke: Just to expand on that Dave, as you were the man literally defining the official timeline! Where did the Apocalypse aliens come from and why were they so different? What was their place in the X-Com Universe? It always fascinated me that the Sectoids appeared as food in one of the later alien buildings.
» Dave: You see, that’s the real crux of the problem—they don’t fit in! The Sectoids are a powerful race (second only to the Ethereals in the “official history”). How would they be subjugated and bred as food?

The absolute honest answer is that we hadn’t really figured out what the Apocalypse aliens were all about. We were hoping to kind of breeze by that point and get back to the original aliens. Sorry I don’t have a better answer, but that’s the honest truth.

He couldn't even make up s*** for the Apocalypse fans. What a great guy! He even says he is abandoning them, and never coming back! What great continuity! Don't forget the Floaters, Dave.
---------------

Personally i'd like a new cast of aliens in a total remake...well not as "total" as 2K likes to define it. A spiritual remake...something like Total Annihilation and Supreme commander, which is not that bad of an adaptation.

I wanted:

http://img39.imageshack.us/i/swatxcom.jpg/



Not this ☺☺☺☺:

http://www.maximumpc.com/files/u46190/xcom5.jpg

Now your talking! That image really looks cool, and gives me a clear idea of what you are going for.

[Nosmirc]

He couldn't even make up s*** for the Apocalypse fans. What a great guy! He even says he is abandoning them, and never coming back! What great continuity! Don't forget the Floaters, Dave.

You need to remember that I never found Apoc all that interesting (it also doesn't help that playing it now, my time options are slow, slow, slow, next event now, nor that the backwards step in graphical interfaces annoys me to no end). I shed no tears for the loss of Mega Primus. To be honest, the series needed a 'back to basics', and Genesis was the best potential for that while still forwarding the X-Com contiunity. Otherwise the only way a 'back to basics' could work is with a reboot.

Now that the gaming industry has developed so many storytelling tools and elements, as well as refined setting and story writing since the 90s, a modernization of X-Com would be a brilliant thing.

Then I guess I win. You lose.

No. It's just that we've argued over that far too much. I see no point in discussing it with you when you only have one thing in mind: I hate Ellis wah! I've presented countless counters to your Ellis bashing, but you just ignore them and keep up the mantra. Maybe once you've grown past "Ellis is a big meanie and he sucks!", there might be room for discussion.

Yeah, but now I think the black blob and.... Whatever-That-Thing-Is are more mysterious then the space Sectoids Nazi.

Explain.

[podtech115]

Yeah, but now I think the black blob and.... Whatever-That-Thing-Is are more mysterious then the space Sectoids Nazi.

Explain.

I could give you a giant explanation, but it's hard to gain the will to do so. Instead, here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KebJgjlNLtk
This was really stupid, gay, and what completely and utterly finally ruins X-COM forever.

I can't explain it to you.... but Vern can. In fact, he explained it in his review of Terminator Salvation:

But other than just having a weak script I think McG’s first real blunder is toward the end when he has Skynet talk in the form of Helena Bonham Carter and explain everything. Not only is it bad storytelling but it’s just such an obvious mistake to take this terrifying inhuman entity and give it a human face like in RESIDENT EVIL. If you have to make it talk (and trust me McG, you don’t have to) at least come up with some creepy weird computery ☺☺☺☺ like HAL 9000 or something. The movie is so full of cool robot noises and distorted talk over radios and ☺☺☺☺, they could’ve come up with something better than this for sure.

P.S. I thought the alien saying "Doomday Project" was also stupid:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bB9HEf_7RRE

[Nosmirc]

Nnnrgh....pardon me, but my country is going through an election at a moment, so I really don't care for question dodging.

My question did not involve Interceptor. It does not involve Terminator Salvation, and it sure the hell didn't involve that moron Vern who obviously has no idea what he's talking about (since there's a perfectly reasonable reason for Skynet doing what it did, but I won't go into that because it's not revelant to my question).

You made the claim. Back it up. You said the blobs are more mysterious then Sectoids. Again I ask. How? Explain yourself, in your own words this time. No links, just text, of YOUR thoughts and noone elses.

[Tanki]

Quit this babbling and enjoy some Alien Entertainment!

[Nosmirc]

Hmmm...so....the alien empire was merely looking for a new place to stage their latest rave? NOT ON MY WORLD SUCKAS!

[podtech115]

You made the claim. Back it up. You said the blobs are more mysterious then Sectoids. Again I ask. How? Explain yourself, in your own words this time. No links, just text, of YOUR thoughts and noone elses.

Okay, here I go: Because, at worst, the blobs are unthinking animals, at best, are like the Colour Out of Space.
I don't know where they come from,
I don't know how they are made,
I don't know what they were made for,
I don't know what they want,
I don't know if they can think,
and I don't know what their full powers are.

The Sectoids, on the other hand.... If they are *anything* like the Ethereal from that video, then they are just like the stupid super villains from cartoons in the 1970s.

Going back to that Ethereal video, it made all the aliens sound so dumb, because he sounds just like every other "Dr. Evil" bad guy ever! Finish that giant laser! Finish that bomb! Finish that DeathStar!

What is worse, the Ethereal shows human emotions, like anger, impatience, and an unwillingness to understand the situation. He even threatens to do something bad to the other alien. And I know what he threatens him with.


Also, can anyone tell me where the Ethereal says "nasty, bad alien dude out"?

When you create a terrifying inhuman entity that people will fear, you must be very, very, very careful in creating it. Interceptor was a huge, F***ing mistake, because now I can only think of them (Sectoids/Ethereal) as cut-out paper bad guys.




Sorry, I know you don't like links and quotes. But I really need to quote this guy to make my point:

Horror requires methodical, pitch-perfect pacing in order to truly get under your skin, and it needs to build slowly to truly draw you in and make you afraid.

http://www.fangoria.com/index.php?id...ola&Itemid=228

Well, that's it. That's the best I can do. I don't think I can make it clearer then that.

[Nosmirc]

Alright. Fair enough.

But I challenge this of you. Why is it not possible to reboot the original aliens in a fashion that makes them mysterious....while at the same time being famililar?

Let's assume that the average X-Com fans dream sorta came true, and this game at very least uses the original setting for the reboot.

Being a reboot, 2k would have the freedom to recreate the Sectoid lore, without being locked into the admittedly campy style of Interceptor. With modern techinques, there's a great deal they could explore with the original aliens, and still keep it fresh.

For example, in the originals, their psi attacks was just a pulse that appeared on our units. In a modern version, their terror psi attacks could be assaulting the soldiers senses with vivid imagery that is, well, alien, and can cause undesirable visual effects on the player (not unlike Eternal Darkess, although not to the point of breaking the fourth wall). For mind control, take a page from Dead Space 2. The scene where Isaac encounters his dead girlfriend, and she's trying to stab him in the eye...you quickly learn that it's an illusion, and it's Isaac resisting himself from stabbing him in the eye.

They can also better define the hierarchy of the aliens. I've always kinda pictured Sectoids as the guys in charge, with Etherals being a sort of evolved Sectoid (or even Sectoids whom have modified their bodies to drastically boost their psionics?). Mutons would be the shocktroopers, Snakemen the grunts, and Floaters the sniper and scouts.

In short, by rebooting, they can start off the original gang with a blank slate, and make them mysterious while at the same time be familiar. Why would that not be preferrable? They'd basically be a new enemy based on the originals.

[podtech115]

But I challenge this of you. Why is it not possible to reboot the original aliens in a fashion that makes them mysterious....while at the same time being famililar?

Hmm.... You have a point there.

Let me ask you this: would you see the remake of Alien (1979), if the alien and story was the same? Would you think it was better then the original?

It's not the same thing like The Dark Knight, because you *wanted* to see the new Joker. You wanted the Joker. It's not like you wanted to see Black Mask, or Hush, or Hugo Strange, or Ventriloquist, or Mr. Zsasz, or, oh-my-geez, Tweedledum and Tweedledee.

[Nosmirc]

No. I've already seen Alien and how it ends. I wouldn't want to see the exact same story. The alien itself doesn't need any drastic changes however. Would it be better? How can I say if a theorical film remake was better then it's original?

As for Batman, it would be nice to see a Batman continunity go longer then 3 movies, provided it was good. Nolan's Batman is good, although it has an issue in that most of Batman's villians don't work with the tone his movies have. But Dark Knight Rises is the final one. DC is rebooting Batman so that they can do Justice League (which really doesn't sound all that hot...Marvel has the right idea, showcase everyone individually, then provide a story where they come together, not the other way around)

That said, most of those enemies you mentioned can work well for a Nolan style Batman movie, particularly Hush, Huge Strange, and Zsasz, although Hush would need a movie to setup him up first, introducing key characters close to Batman...

In any event...when it comes to X-Com, continuing the original storyline is a bad idea since none of the original writers are involved. So a reboot is a natural idea. It's just that 2k seems to be missing the primary idea behind a reboot: invoking the feelings people had when playing the originals.

[podtech115]

....without being locked into the admittedly campy style of Interceptor.

Does that mean you finally think Interceptor sucks? Do you finally agree Dave Ellis is an idiot?

I don't want to say you're dumb , but geeeeeeeeeeeeeez. It took you 90 posts for you to understand that Ellis is bad for X-COM? :_: We could have been talking about something more important! :_:

The worst part is 2K David is going to take 20 points from me, just for calling you dumb. :_: Life sucks.

P.S. sorry for calling you dumb

[AlphaCent]

God, podtech...you are amazing.

You'd write an entire story out of two unconnected words.

[Nosmirc]

Didn't say it sucked. Just that it had a campy style. Campy can be good, depending on the type of game. Personally, X-Com had strayed from the winning forumla after Apoc, so any annoyance at the change of style in the game was experienced in the previous game. One could even say the name of Apocalypse was fitting in that sense.

But being campy wasn't Interceptors biggest issue. It was that it tried to bridge fanbases of two things together, but didn't particulary succeed at either. Wing Commander and X-Wing were simply better space sims, and it was a genre the existing fan base wasn't hugely excited by, at least that's the impression I've always had.

Does admitting it was campy equate to saying Ellis was bad for X-Com? No. Don't put words in my mouth (posts?). I believe he learned his lesson, and was taking X-Com back to the feel of the original two games, which was vital for jumpstarting the series again.

As for your 'points', well, you need to learn how to debate without insulting the other party. Amongst other debating...things...

Didn't even know there were points on this forum until you mentioned that you lost some lol.

[podtech115]

Small post here:

Podtech: So if you wanted to know what Alliance's Agents would have sounded like, just go see the jarheads in Battle: Los Angeles

Nosmirc: Why would that be bad? If the goal was to depict soldiers in a stressful situation....mission accomplished?

Hate isn't a strong enough word to show how I feel about jarheads. They are very, very annoying. They **ALL** act the same: All smug:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature...PArPZOo#t=144s
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature...PArPZOo#t=175s
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y8SGF...ailpage#t=199s
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q1Wvo...ailpage#t=193s
And that was only the jarheads from one game.

You said the big reason you don't like NGE is because of Shinji. I would take a cast full of Shinjies, then to have so much as one jarhead.

Do you have any idea how much I dislike jarheads? Here is just one review of Battle: Los Angeles:
http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/...110309992/1023

Now, one of the reasons I like Shinji is because he is crazy. You don't find characters like that as good guys. He's multifaceted.

[Nosmirc]

Um...

Military shooters are....gonna have jarheads....don't know what to tell ya there.

[podtech115]

Um...

Military shooters are....gonna have jarheads....don't know what to tell ya there.

I didn't think Marcus Fenix, Chris Redfield, or Master Chief were jarheads. In fact, I liked them.

[Codex]

I didn't think Marcus Fenix, Chris Redfield, or Master Chief were jarheads. In fact, I liked them.

None of those are military shooters though. Halo is a sci-fi game, as is Gears of War and Resident Evil is all about zombies. They're not military shooters. Besides, Gears and Halo are FILLED with jarheads. All the marines in the halo series are stereotypical Jars as are most of the COGS in Gears.

Moreover, and this is the point here, Master Chief and Fenix aren't exactly non-stereotypical characters. Fenix is full of the 80's action hero grunts and tough one-liners, and Master Chief is... Well. I've only played Halo Three and if his voice actor delivered his lines in the cut scenes any stiffer I would have believed the man must have gone into rigor mortis at the mic. The Chief was built as a tabula rasa, he's technically not a character but a medium.

The thing is, jarheads are stereotypes, as are Fenix and the Chief. Gaming is full of them. Until writing for games becomes more like writing for movies (which is something that can only happen in games that are meant to have a story as a part of the game in the first place and has to be so intricately woven with the gameplay that, to many, it hasn't been completed yet) the stereotypes will continue to exist.

Battle: LA wasn't trying to be something new and fresh and exiting beyond it's pretty explosions and battle scenes. It was trying to be an action movie and fill as many action movie tropes so that it could make as much money as possible from the "oh hey, it's an action movie - let's go see it" crowd. So yeah, it was bound to have "characters" (and I use the term loosely) that people related to when something new and pretty (ie: big boom booms) were taking place.

[podtech115]

None of those are military shooters though. Halo is a sci-fi game, as is Gears of War and Resident Evil is all about zombies. They're not military shooters. Besides, Gears and Halo are FILLED with jarheads. All the marines in the halo series are stereotypical Jars as are most of the COGS in Gears.

Moreover, and this is the point here, Master Chief and Fenix aren't exactly non-stereotypical characters. Fenix is full of the 80's action hero grunts and tough one-liners, and Master Chief is... Well. I've only played Halo Three and if his voice actor delivered his lines in the cut scenes any stiffer I would have believed the man must have gone into rigor mortis at the mic. The Chief was built as a tabula rasa, he's technically not a character but a medium.

The thing is, jarheads are stereotypes, as are Fenix and the Chief. Gaming is full of them. Until writing for games becomes more like writing for movies (which is something that can only happen in games that are meant to have a story as a part of the game in the first place and has to be so intricately woven with the gameplay that, to many, it hasn't been completed yet) the stereotypes will continue to exist.

Battle: LA wasn't trying to be something new and fresh and exiting beyond it's pretty explosions and battle scenes. It was trying to be an action movie and fill as many action movie tropes so that it could make as much money as possible from the "oh hey, it's an action movie - let's go see it" crowd. So yeah, it was bound to have "characters" (and I use the term loosely) that people related to when something new and pretty (ie: big boom booms) were taking place.

....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
.... I can't believe, of all the people, that you would make a post like that, and defend jarheads/Battle: LA. In fact, you sound like a guy. On top of all that, it's almost like your talking for Nosmirc. WTF?

I'll only say one thing, about this: play xcom interceptor, and then see if you still like jarheads.
----------------

This is how much I hate jarheads:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DtZgsrIIhog

[Codex]

I'm NOT defending jarheads. I'm saying in games where there is no story and the focus is instead on the mechanics or on other things than a story there needs to be something to relate to. That thing to relate to are character archetypes. What is the archetype of a foot soldier? Jarhead.

I'm not saying that I like the use of them - in story based games they make me roll my eyes and focus on something else (IE: in Gears the characters make me focus on the graphics) - but stereotpyical characters need to be in a game were the focus is so intently on something else. From what I've managed to play of X-Com: UFO Defense (and no, I can't afford to go out and buy any of the other ones yet so yes, once again I am coming at it from a completely uneducated on the game angle to you, podtech) this is the exact point that people have been making about adding the 50's setting along with the story to the game.

Now, if you'd like to comment on any of the points I made in my post, feel free to. However, just sitting there saying you "didn't expect me to make a post like that" isn't really adding to the conversation, is it?

PS: Moreover, pod, a public post on a forum is not a one way conversation. Anyone can answer it. I was not answering for another user, I was speaking with my own opinion something. That is more than acceptable on a discussion board.

[podtech115]

This is not fair. I'm very afraid to talk to you, because I don't know if you're going to give me an infraction, or banned me for the smallest thing. I mean, really? I get an infraction for making a joke?

What is also not fair, is that in a topic like this, is I'm on 'Team Bad Guy', and everyone else is on 'Team Good Guy'. That means, if I make a rebuttal to one guy, someone on his team will defend him, making me look weak.

Anyways,


I don't know what you are talking about:

I'm NOT defending jarheads. I'm saying in games where there is no story and the focus is instead on the mechanics or on other things than a story there needs to be something to relate to. That thing to relate to are character archetypes. What is the archetype of a foot soldier? Jarhead.

Huh? Character archetypes? Like Jar Jar is an archetype of a comedy relief character? If the character archetypes actually hurt the story, then why have them at all? Why not have a bunch of soulless robots instead? It's not like anyone is going to hate robots. It worked for Terminator 2. And I understand that a movie needs some character archetypes, but games?

Or what about Shadow of the Colossus? I didn't need to see Wander openly cry about the girl, going 'WHERE'S MY WIFE?', or "making him more human" by acting like a annoying Jack[Something], like Shia LaBeouf or Josh Duhamel in Transformers. Wander looks cool, and acts cool, I don't need him to be a dumb boy, THANK YOU VERY MUCH, FOR LIFE!!!!

Footnote: they are making a Shadow of the Colossus movie. It will be awful. I know they are going to make Wander talk, and there is nothing we can do about it. I know the need for him to talk, but still. You can't have him walking around the land, and killing Colossus, after Colossus. If only Fumito Ueda could have added a bigger backstory to the game, maybe it could have worked. But Shadow of the Colossus is no Watchmen.


Or how about Snake from MGS4? He didn't ack like a Jarhead. And if he did act like a Jarhead, I don't think anyone would be crying at his big death scene.

but stereotpyical characters need to be in a game were the focus is so intently on something else. From what I've managed to play of X-Com: UFO Defense .... this is the exact point that people have been making about adding the 50's setting along with the story to the game.

Again, Huh?

Look, let me tell you what I *really* want: I want everybody to love X-COM/games as much as books and movies. That's all I want! And the only way that is going to happen is if X-COM/games becomes ART. And the only way for it to become ART, is by having a great story! Story is the only true universal language. Without a great story, it doesn't matter how absolutely stupendously amazing the gameplay is; if there is no story then non-gamers won't care! Just look at the movie of the Super Mario Bros! Everyone working on that movie knew how BLEEPING stupid the game was. Anyone who doesn't play games right now thinks games are for nerds and losers, and they're right:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature...k_GEBv1Q#t=30s

That's why X-COM ***NEEDS*** this; it needs a story! So retarded idiots like Dave Ellis won't BLEEP it up with there own garbage ideas of what X-COM should act like! Or else, Roger Ebert is right and games can't be art:
http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/2010...er_be_art.html

On another topic: can you tell me what you think of Evangelion? Do you think it could make for a good X-COM game? Or vice versa?


(I took the time to give a full reply, so please be nice and don't give me an infraction.)

[Codex]

Podtech, you really need to read the forum rules. Discussing infractions in posts is not permitted, neither is insulting people (be they devs or other forum members). That's all I am going to say on your rant about infractions - next time they will get you an infraction. Here is a link to the forum rules.

You're not on team anything. I still don't agree with the majority of people that XCOM won't be a good game/not X-Com. However there isn't enough information out there for me to judge it yet. There probably won't be until I have my controller in my hot little hands.

I've never played Shadow of the Collossus or Metal Gear Solid. I don't own a playstation, and as such I cannot comment.

The big thing is that, imo, there isn't a story in the X-Com game that I have played. There's a scenario. Making a story from a scenario is nearly impossible.

You mention Super Mario Bros, specifically it's translation to a movie. However Super Mario Bros is not a game with a story, it's a game with a very stereotypical, archetypal scenario. Heroic knight saves princess from an evil dragon. Sure, they're made up from the imagination of someone on... well. They're made up from an interesting place but that is essentially the "story" of the game. It's a scenario, not a plot.

In comparison, look at some of the recent translation of comic books to movies. Comic books are nothing but story. You yourself in a post a little while ago went off about how stupid comic books were because they had that 50 years of backstory that had been destroyed, rebuilt and destroyed again (for example, I turn to DC Comic's Infinite Crisis and Infinite Crisis on Infinite Earths). But comic books are all story - they may only have a tiny, infinitely small chunk in each issue, but it's like an episode of a TV show.

X-Com is not that. At least, UFO Defense isn't. It's a playable scenario, just like Mario.

The thing is, no matter what people say, games are art. They take talent and time to make and it's not something that every tom dick and harry can come off the street and profess to have the ability to do. Just like movies and books, videogames have genre's and niches. They don't all have to be the exact same to get public or critical attention - in fact it's when they don't that they cause the biggest stink.

As for anyone who "doesn't play games" thinking games are for losers, it is so much more socially acceptable to be a gamer nowadays than it was 20 years ago, ten years ago even. Parents, who haven't touched a game since pong, play video games. Sure, they're wii, old folk friendly games, but they still play them. The amount of people I knew who went from "cool kid" in highschool to playing videogames all the time with their hot boyfriends (who were playing things like Halo, Gears, Metal Gear etcetera) is astonishing.

Edit: Also, did I ever say I liked battle LA or Transformers? No! I did not, I said that for what the former was it worked and I never mentioned the latter

Edit 2: Evangelion... Nope, never watched more than an episode. Doesn't interest me. I'm not a fan of mecha anime and what anime I do watch/read has to be different/interesting. EVA from what I watched was just another run of the mill mech anime.

[Nosmirc]

Ha. Mario Brothers proved one thing: Not everything needs a movie adaptation. There's no way to make a decent, comprensible story out of Mario Brothers. It would come out as a stoner movie, where you needing to be so high, you're sitting on the sky.

On Art and X-Com: How about we focus on getting it at least to the fans of the series first? Sure, an animated series (live action would probably be too expensive to do IMO, without it looking bad), or a comic would be nice, but there isn't even a game series ongoing for it period. Priorities man!

SotC: Acted cool? The Wanderer didn't act PERIOD! There was barely the faintest scraps of a personality, and those might have just been tricks of the light. And being a young kid, one has to wonder how he did not freak out and jump off a cliff after the first couple of fights.

Eva: What IS your obession with mashing up NGE with X-Com? You keep bringing it up, despite noone showing any interest in it at all. It honestly sounds like trying to mix oil and water.

[Brian Damage]

Y'know, speaking about movies, I actually feel Battle LA hit more than a few of the thematic and content notes that would be required for an X-Com movie. For one thing the entire movie felt like an extended terror mission, complete with civilians. Then there was the whole bit about finding the aliens' weakness, which was almost an in-field autopsy (except for the fact that the subject was alive). There was the bit where a fuel pump explosion is intentionally used to take out what could only be described as an alien HWP with similar behaviour and weaponry to a cyberdisc. And at the end there was the surprise attack on an alien base.

I mean, hell, it even comes with a kind of UFOPaedia, complete with a suspiciously familiar-sounding name:

http://unidentifiedenemy.com/

Do any of you guys think one or more of the writers could have been X-Com fans?

[AlphaCent]

Battle LA comes in theaters next week and i can't wait to go see it.

My plan is to first buy the ticket for a good seat, buy popcorn and a soda, take a huge piss and/or possibly dump beforehand, stack up on half pound stones (for the loud idiots and other would be annoyances), switch off my brains higher functions and enjoy the movie.

[Brian Damage]

Sorry, Alpha, should have spoilered that stuff in my last post to begin with - I didn't think. Hope I haven't reduced your eventual enjoyment of the film.

[Nosmirc]

Speaking of Battle LA, I just watched it. I'm sorry, what's the problem with how the soldiers acted? It's like Independance Day except minus the stupid stuff.

And Brian Damage, suggesting it's like a terror mission is very fitting. That sort of action would be great for a X-Com fps, really. Do it 2k, come on!

[AlphaCent]

Don't worry, i've skipped all the parts that had LA or battle written.

[podtech115]

Speaking of Battle LA, I just watched it. I'm sorry, what's the problem with how the soldiers acted? It's like Independance Day except minus the stupid stuff.

[sigh] How do I say it without sounding rude?

Look, Nosmirc. It is pointless to tell you, because:

1, You love Dave Ellis, for no real reason.

2. You like a movie that almost everyone else *hated*. Most of the reviews are like this:

"Battle: Los Angeles" is noisy, violent, ugly and stupid. Its manufacture is a reflection of appalling cynicism on the part of its makers, who don't even try to make it more than senseless chaos. Here's a science-fiction film that's an insult to the words "science" and "fiction," and the hyphen in between them. You want to cut it up to clean under your fingernails.

When I think of the elegant construction of something like "Gunfight at the OK Corral," I want to rend the hair from my head and weep bitter tears of despair. Generations of filmmakers devoted their lives to perfecting techniques that a director like Jonathan Liebesman is either ignorant of, or indifferent to. Yet he is given millions of dollars to produce this assault on the attention span of a generation.

Young men: If you attend this crap with friends who admire it, tactfully inform them they are idiots. Young women: If your date likes this movie, tell him you've been thinking it over, and you think you should consider spending some time apart.
http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/...110309992/1023

Eva: What IS your obession with mashing up NGE with X-Com? You keep bringing it up, despite noone showing any interest in it at all. It honestly sounds like trying to mix oil and water.

That's because I have something called "imagination".

When I say 'city', you think of a boring GTA city like this:
http://www.proneblock.com/pics/gta33.jpg

When I say 'city', I'm thinking of this:
http://ipwalls.com/wp-content/upload...24-450x450.jpg
http://www.wallpaperden.com/pics/3d-sci-fi-city-3.jpg
http://digital-art-gallery.com/oid/3...igital_art.jpg
http://ipwalls.com/wp-content/upload...-1024x1024.jpg
http://www.gotowallpapers.com/wallpa...54420-2a45.jpg

My idea of an X-COM NGE, would have made it a TB. It would have played a bit like Advance Wars and Shogun 2: Total War.

[Codex]

Okay, this thread is so far off topic now that it's done. Evangelion has nothing to do with X-COM Interceptor/Apocalypse and the arguments are just going in circles.

If you want to talk about an anime, beyond how actually using your words to explain why it fits in the X-COM universe (or could) please take it to the off topic section of the boards. Without actually explaining why it matters in posts it's equating to spamming links.